Skip to main content

About your Search

20121224
20130101
STATION
CNNW 4
CNBC 2
MSNBCW 2
CSPAN 1
FBC 1
KQED (PBS) 1
KRON (MyNetworkTV) 1
WETA 1
WJZ (CBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 21
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)
, the president put a trillion dollar in changes, medicaid, medicare and changes that nancy pelosi and speaker don't want to see. the and white house's defense is look, if the republicans are not going to play ball on revenue and tax increases they're fnot going to put the spending cuts on the table. this started out as a discussion about cutting the debt, cutting the deficit and now what's going to happen is th smallest plans on the table are going to-- are not really going to cut the deficit in the long run and don't have major spending cuts and i noticed at one point when he was asked about the sequester, not just the tax side, but the automatic spending cuts about to kick in. he said if we raise revenue by the wealthy paying more, that would be sufficient to turn off this request or what's called the automatic spending cuts and that's what republicans have been suggesting if he raises more revenue raising taxes on the rich, he's not going to put it towards the deficit, but the president kind of suggested that today. >> and a question from the beginning and it's your segment, go ahead. >> i've
the house had to clean up its act. nancy pelosi helped create the oce as a solution. the oce has done more than 100 investigations of lawmakers raising serious questions about possibly congressional misdeeds. in 37 of those investigations, the oce referred them on to the twauld house ethics committee for further review meaning in those 37 cases the oce found reason to believe that house ethics and federal laws were likely violated. so why does congress want to kill it? actually that's hard to say. folks like these who have in the past voted to cut the oce budget refused to talk to us. for those who would talk, opinions were mixed. >> i think it's important that there be some way for the public or someone outside of congress to raise issues about the conduct of members of congress. some of the things that oce has sent to the ethics committee was actually pretty flimsy. >> i supported it the first time, i'll support it again. >> is there anything oce has done specifically that might have rubbed the congress the wrong way to the point where they wouldn't want to get it going again? >> in fact
to the house floor, nancy pelosi, democratic leader, and the president, looks like they will have to provide a lot of democratic votes for this to get it through and with maybe a handful of republicans. so. the initial feedback from house republicans is, the lack of spending cuts is not acceptable to them. ashley: yeah, not acceptable. peter barnes, thank you so much with the latest from the white house. >> you bet. lori: let's continue our discussion what is ahead for the country as of tomorrow with regard to the cliff. congressman scott rigel, welcome and aei economist, fill clip swaying he will about. you're in favor of raising taxes, you signed grover norquist's pledge to not raise taxes. you're now rebuking. 450 for joint filers being the cuttoff. which classification of earnings you ultimately will see their taxes increase? >> well, lori, it is very difficult to understand where we go from here because i haven't seen the agreement and, when i look at what ply colleagues really objected to and what was referred to as plan. about, it is difficult to understand why this plan is anything o
necessary to run the programs he wanted and nancy pelosi tells me there are members in her caucus wants taxes to go up and howard dean not shy saying that taxes should go up on everyone for months. there's a major part of the democrats who want the rates to go up and are public about it. the question, does the president have the interest to stand town that part of the party or does he want taxes to go up and blame the republican. >> harris: first time since 1970 congress is working between christmas and new years. how do you negotiate with someone who is determined basically to see is fail and see us go over into extreme high taxes? >> we don't and one of the most insightful things i've read in the the last couple of weeks, the dialog between mr. boehner and the president off the election and mr. boehner put 800 billion of revenues on the table and talking about negotiations and the president says i get that for free, i'm not giving you anything for 800 billion dollars. and washington is a rumor mill, as you can probably mante imagine, and we've heard that the change cpi would be off th
winners and losers. i think no winners kristal disagrees. >> i have a few. one is nancy pelosi because compared to john boehner i would say she looks like the greatest speaker of the house of all time. not un, surprisingly, mitt romney, because even though i'm sure he would rather be president, at least he doesn't deal with the mess himself. next on my list, rich people. we don't know what the deal looks like but you can bet they're on top in some way. they always do. and finally, toure, speak for yourself. i feel like a winner because as much as it is lame at work today, i would rather be here than in congress where i was trying to be so there you go. >> that's one way of spinning it. >> it's a -- i'm going to just kind of duck the question here. i don't want to get in to the winners and losers thing but a comment because i'm trying to piece it together over the last few days and months and i'm honestly and we'll see the final count tour contours of this an first reaction is what was the last year and a half all about? it looked like a pivot point in the presidency at the end of the
. or nancy pelosi saying you have to pass the bill to know what's in it. i don't think any republican ought to be touching this stuff. >> mr. speaker, hold on for a second. alley vels i velshi is with us. >> speaker, sorry to bother you while you're on vacation. listen, you called this an artificial creation of washington. you have actually suggested the many things that make up the fiscal cliff be divided up and tackles separately. i want you to listen to what president obama said earlier today and get your comment on it. let's listen to this. >> we're going to solve this problem instead in several steps. >> speaker gingrich, do you think this is the way to do it? we're at an impasse. are we going to do that? >> we're going to solve it in several steps. why aren't people trying to solve it a few hours before midnight on new year's eve? everybody knows you can retroactively -- the president could instruct the treasury tomorrow morning to hold all withholding rates at the current amount on the presumption that they have reroactively to january 1st fixed the taxes by march 1st. it's not a goo
're probably going to get a deal where nancy pelosi and the house is going to have to produce a hundred or so votes from her caucus because you probably got at least 50 house republicans who just don't want to vote for any tax increase. you could possible that kind of deal together and if there's any chance of this getting done, it will be that kind of deal where you get 70 votes in the senate, democrats and republicans alike, and then you get maybe 100 republicans and a few more democrats than that that put it together in the house. but here is the point. we got these big fiscal problems, and this is -- ali, we're going to be talking about this for a year no matter what happens with the short-term deal because we still have the debt ceiling, we have a budget deal on the spending. we've got a big financial crisis on our hands, and this is, unfortunately, just act one. >> the sad part is we don't have to have anything that looks like a financial crisis. we could actually have a good economy. >> let me say one thing -- >> that's the problem. >> let me say one thing about this issue of the debt
then becomes can john boehner muster 40 or 45 republican votes and then use the 185 or 190 votes that nancy pelosi would deliver, potentially for a deal like 24 with no spending cuts to pass it there, tomorrow or the next day. the house side is unclear at this point. >> woodruff: so todd, you're saying as we sit here this evening, we're hearing there may be a senate vote tonight, the house may vote tomorrow. but at this point, it still is not known the outlines of what a potential deal would look like. >> i think the outlines are known on the tax side. and it was described accurately in your piece there, judy, with the tax rates at 450 for families, dividends would go up, the estate tax part of it. what is important is the one year extension on unemployment benefits. there are 2 million people set to lose their benefits, so that is all in there. everybody must keep in mind that no matter what happens, even if you are under 450 or 250 as the president has been discussing, your taxes are going up tonight because the payroll tax holiday expires, that happens for everybody. they're not going to
they voted against it because they were mad at a speech nancy pelosi gave and they were ridiculed in that. and we had john mccain and his ambivalence on the floor. and then we saw mitch mcconnell coming up saying, yes, mr. president, you have been bashing us for weeks, let's vote on those tax rates. mitch mcconnell said let's do that and we'll leave the sequester aside. we'll let it kick into place. we'll tackle that whenever we get back here to washington after the inauguration and the state of the union and all that fun stuff. so that's where we stand right now. that does remain the last sticking point. >> luke, jump in here. what do you have to add that mike has already told us. >> well, mike viqueira is 12, 13 years of experience on capitol hill, so there's not much more to add after that. what i will say is i don't think that we can dismiss a lot of the anger on the republican side at the president's remarks today. i have gotten a ton of e-mails from republican aides saying the president is holding the middle class tax cuts that were agreed to hostage. i think if you take a step back
and then use the 185 or 190 votes that nancy pelosi would deliver potentially for a deal like 24 with no spending cuts to pass it there tomorrow or the next day. the house side is unclear at this point. >> woodruff: so todd you're saying as we sit here this evening, we're hearing there may be a senate vote tonight the house may vote tomorrow. but at this point, it still is not known the outlines of what a potential deal would look like. >> i think the outlines are known on the tax side. and it was described accurately in your piece there, judy, with the tax rates at 450 for families dividends would go up, the estate tax part of it. what is important is the one year extension on unemployment benefits. there are 2 million people set to lose their benefits, so that is all in there. everybody must keep in mind that no matter what happens even if you are under 450 or 250 as the president has been discussing your taxes are going up tonight because the payroll tax holiday expires, that happens for everybody. they're not going to renew that holiday. so that is important to remember. on t
has called majority leader read as well as the house speaker and democratic leader nancy pelosi. watching wall street we have good news with unemployment. the number of americans filing for unemployment dropped. after senator reid made the comment that we would go over the fiscal cliff is starting to slide. >> former president h. w. bush is in intensive care in a houston hospital this morning. he has been hospitalized since last month with what was described as a stubborn fever. pete is on and all liquid diet and has been an the east i see you since sunday. he was hospitalized recently with a broad patterns like cough but now it is the persistent fever. thursday and traffic is nice and light. it is still chilly this morning we are looking for a high of just 52 this afternoon. [ female announcer ] now get high speed internet at home on our newly expanded advanced digital network, a connection you can count on. introducing at&t u-verse high speed internet with more speed options, reliability and wi-fi hot spots than ever. call at&t now to get u-verse high speed internet for as lit
but remember something about the actual threshold. chuck schumer and nancy pelosi, this summer suggest ad million dollars be the mark for which people begin to pay higher tax rates, not 2 a $50,000. so i think the president definitely stretched his definition of millionaires and billionaires by putting 250 rate income level as that rate but he is getting extension of unemployment benefits he wants as well. so he certainly outmaneuvered us on this one but the real irony here that this whole process was born out of deficit reduction. now the reports are it might add to the deficit. that is counter intuitive. gregg: or at least the 800 plus billion in new revenue would be wiped out by $800 billion into l new spending. it is dead-even and not a nickel goes to deficit reduction. kirsten, if that happens, won't the american people say, hey, wait a minute, wasn't this whole thing supposed to be about reducing the deficit? >> no, they won't. this is fundamental fun political point the republicans seem incapable of understanding. for all their claims this is what the country is obsessed with this
through the emergency measures we needed. in fact, when george bush came to harry reid and nancy pelosi in late 2007 and said the economy is slipping, i need a stimulus, they worked with him to do it. it was when barack obama got elected that the republicans followed mitch mcconnell's declaration that defeating the president was his number one agenda item. deadlock came in when the american people decided, as they have obviously every right to do, that they didn't like the people they voted for in 2008, and we're going to vote for diametrically opposed people in 2010. but if you look before that happened, before 2011, you've got a pretty functional system. the problem is not structural. it's who the people are. i do believe that as a result of the 2012 election, some of those who were elected who really don't believe in governance, are losing their ability to screw things up. >> mr. congressman, i know we'll have you back again. but it will be as a participant in the private sector debate. congratulations on everything. happy new year. >> thank you. >> congressman barney frank from wash
leader mitch mcconnell. john boehner not in this, nancy pelosi isn't in this, not even the president. the house reconvenes at 10:00, the senate at 11:00, bright and early. sarcastic. neither of them showing particular signs of progress. >> these two worked together in the senate for 20 years. so you hope -- >> in fairness, the houses are not convening. these guys are not working. i don't care if it doesn't play out in the media. the big stumbling block has been avoided. republicans dropped their demand to reduce social security cost of living increases. >> i was really gratified to hear republicans had taken the demand for social security benefits off the table. truth is, they never should have been on the table to begin with there is still significant distance between the two sides, but negotiations continue. >> the consequences of this are too high for the american people to be engaged in a political messaging campaign. i'm interested in getting a result here. >> they have all been politically messaging, not sure why they are being critical of it now. thousands of there's of your t
speaker nancy pelosi and senate majority leader harry reid revisitted the bush tax cuts. in two separate votes in february, 2009, and december, 2010, democrats could have increased taxes on the wealthy if they really believed that what they now say. did they raise taxes on the wealthy? no. why not? democrats could have permanently protected lower and middle income families there higher taxes if democrats really believed what they now say. did they? no. why not? mr. speaker, why would a democrat congress and white house say they want to tax the wealthy but not do it? why would a democrat congress and white house say they want permanent tax relief for lower and middle income taxpayers yet not give it? the answer is simple, washington democrats twice voted against tax increases on the wealthy and twice voted against giving permanent tax relief to lower and middle income families so that they could run campaigns onp human emotions like greed, envy, and class warfare, and campaign against the very tax policies democrats kept in place. thus deflecting attention from the democrats' abysmal reco
of the debt is chained cpi, i think the president's got to go to harry reid and he's got to go to nancy pelosi and say, look, this is not the way i would have done it, but we've got to reach a consensus, it's going to be good for the programs ovnd it's going to bring them back to solvency. >> okay, so here's what else is on the schedule today. the house is going to be reconvening at 9:00 a.m. eastern for debate followed by legislative business. we'll see how things pan out. of course, bring you all of that throughout the day. in addition to all of that, we now have news that the pentagon is preparing to lay off 800,000 civilian employees if a deal is not reached to avoid the fiscal cliff by january 2nd, automatic domestic and military spending cuts will kick in, and the pentagon would be forced to cut 55 billion dollars in spending in the first nine months of 2013. there are a lot of worries in the defense industry, in government, about what that ultimately will all mean. let's take a quick check on the markets, see where things are headed, as market gets ready to open. dow looks like it would
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)